Short answer–no. Newark, NJ, is experimenting with allowing 16-year-olds to vote in school board elections. Given the low turnout and the goofballs who win office (i.e., Moms for Liberty), maybe it wouldn’t be such a bad idea, but I have my doubts. I may be the exception, but I did some stupid things when I was 16. Canoeing in winter on the Pohopoco when the temperature was in the 20s and ice was forming is just one example.
I have never bought into the argument that “if you are old enough to fight, you are old enough to vote.” You want soldiers to obey orders. When the commanding officer tells you to take the hill, you don’t come back with “But sir, there are men on that hill who are shooting at us.” You say,”Yes SIR!” and charge up the hill. Calm reason and rational thought have nothing to do with it.
Also, the corollary to “old enough to fight, old enough to vote” would seem to be “too old to fight, too old to vote.” The qualities you want in a voter are rather different than those of a good soldier.
I think we mature at different levels. You don’t reach a certain age and say, OK, now you are an adult and can do adult stuff. Sixteen may be too young to drive, but not to smoke marijuana. Maybe you shouldn’t drive until you are seventeen. Perhaps you shouldn’t be allowed to vape until you are 25. I think 30 might be a good minimal age for tattooing, although I have seen some saggy tattoos on old people at the gym, so maybe there should also be a maximum age by which they have to be removed.
And while I’m on the subject, I’d keep the minimum age of 35 for the presidency, but I’d put an upper limit on that as well. Say 75. That certainly would have solved a lot of problems in this upcoming election.
How do you feel about requiring national service to earn the right to vote or hold office?
ReplyDeleteI'd oppose. It would be abused, just like the literacy laws and the property qualifications.
ReplyDelete